Intra-articular Injection of Culture-Expanded Mesenchymal Stem Cells Without Adjuvant Surgery in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although many clinical studies have assessed the efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in knee osteoarthritis, evidence on their efficacy remains unclear owing to heterogeneity of cell entity and concomitant procedures. PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of culture-expanded MSCs in knee osteoarthritis in terms of clinical outcome and cartilage repair via meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without adjuvant surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched from inception to December 31, 2018. RCTs with culture-expanded MSCs for treating knee osteoarthritis were included. Studies with adjuvant surgery or cell concentrate were excluded. Quality was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. For meta-analysis, data on clinical outcomes were measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and data on cartilage repair were measured using the Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS); categorization related to improvement was extracted. RESULTS: Six RCTs (203 patients) were included. Two studies were deemed to have a low risk of bias. In pooled analysis, the only significant difference was in the VAS score (mean difference, -13.55; 95% CI, -22.19 to -4.9). In cumulative pain analysis with VAS and WOMAC pain scores, there was significant improvement after treatment (standardized mean difference, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.85 to -0.23). There was no significant difference in cartilage repair assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.51 to 0.73), WORMS (standardized mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI -14.84 to 18.21), or categorical results (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.32-7.59). CONCLUSION: Intra-articular injection of culture-expanded MSCs without adjuvant surgery can improve pain for patients experiencing knee osteoarthritis at short-term follow-up (6-12 months). However, evidence regarding function and cartilage repair remains limited.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.026 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".